Is WiFi harmful for health?
Is WiFi harmful for health?
I chuckled briefly, then reviewed the details. Research indicates 2.45 GHz Wi-Fi may lower sperm count, yet those above have ignored the evidence without investigating. Old articles from 2011 discuss this topic. These remarks probably relate to Wi-Fi's non-ionising properties, which shouldn't cause cancer. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4503846/
It refers to sperm count and radar technology, noting that standing close to a radar for a while can temporarily reduce sperm activity without lasting harm. The comparison highlights that the power involved is significantly greater than typical RF frequencies used in home networks. Edited January 13, 2020 by StarRaidz
TLDNR: No. Someone was trying to sell someone something. If you care about the why: This one is a classic mountebank thing. The trick with this one is technically yes but in practice absolutely not. Non ionizing radiation doesn’t hurt you. WiFi can produce ionizing radiation. But only if you’re a few millimeters from the actual antenna, so what the manufacturers do is bury the antenna in something so you can’t get close enough to it for it to possibly hurt you. If you look at an external WiFi antenna it’s this big thick thing. If you broke it apart all that would be inside it is a wire. If you held that bare wire tightly in your fist for a solid year you might have a problem. So I’m theory, sure, but in practice absolutely not. It’s like being afraid that an unbroken glass bottle will cut you if you so much as touch it.
This result should be approached with caution. The measurements were conducted on mice, which have significantly less mass to absorb RF signals. The antenna's gain rating of 8dBi is irrelevant since dBi indicates antenna performance, not real-world signal strength. Additionally, the reported -25dBm at a distance suggests poor transmission range, likely due to line-of-sight conditions rather than actual performance. While useful for reference, these findings may not apply to human-scale testing.
Same issue with the mountebank scenario, but now focusing on statistical aspects. The sperm count problems are just as problematic for the same reasons. Sperm or sperm cells would need to be extremely sensitive to radiation, or have a significantly reduced threshold for radiation to become harmful.
Acknowledged that smaller mouse size plays a role, but the phrase "We're not freaking mice" doesn't add clarity since you're not comparing impacts clearly. The signal strength mentioned is -28dBm, and in the OP's case, it's about proximity to his crotch. I'll share that public human studies aren't available yet, so I can't confirm the scaling, but early data hints WiFi may reduce sperm count gradually. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/2...fects-WiFi